ACB: First off,I said alittle too PC for me.Overall,I agree with your take on it but it just bothered me a tad-bit with you suggesting that perhpas we should have demonstrated the power of such a bomb in a remote area first.It is alittle too PC for me.

ACB, PC is just going along with the crowd, being afraid to go against popular opinion. And considering a demonstration was so "PC" that Truman considered it. And probably the PC view of the era would have been something along the lines of, "Lets kill as many Japanese as possible!" But YOU think it's PC to consider and alternative to dropping such a horrendous bomb upon a huge civilian population of non-combatants, babies, women and children? As a Christian, we are to show compassion where and whenever we can. Pure military or military industrial targets are understandable to target.

Was the Marshall Plan also too PC for you?

Sorry,but I do still think it was political correctness trying to get involved in a war.Just imagine the money and lives saved if we had did that first.The war would have been over much sooner with alot less lives lost and money and it would've sent a message to not attack the US or you will suffer or it.Remember Pearl Harbor was bombed first.We would have been alot safer. But war is ugly no matter how we look at it and examine it.

Pearl Harbor was a military target, with an estimated 3700 American casualties, of which 48-68 were civilian.

An estimated 192,000 lives were lost as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima. The majority were civilians.

Doesn't war have to be declared before something can be considered a military target?

Philip wrote:Our discussion over when, in wartime, is it moral to kill enemy combatants, got me to thinking about the atom bombs dropped on civilian populations of Japan.

Prior to dropping these, hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians had already been killed by allied bombing. Japan still would not surrender. We must remember, this was NOT in an era of laser-guided bombs of pinpoint accuracy. Many of the targets were military or industrial, but adjacent civilian areas. Against this backdrop, a mere month before, Truman got word the bombs were ready.

Of Truman's options, Option #3 should have been tried first - maybe even twice (they only initially had two bombs to use). And if that did not work, they could have warned of an imminent drop in a given city with ample time for it to be be evacuated. Of course, that doesn't mitigate the issues surrounding radiation or mass displacement of people. But one wonders, after hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, and still no surrender, short of invasion, it's unclear what would have forced a surrender, given the leaderships ethic of death before dishonor. An invasion would have killed more people. In fact, to understand Japan's fanaticism, in 1944 Emperor Hirohito sent out the first imperial order encouraging all Japanese civilians to commit suicide rather than be taken prisoner. So, the empire's leadership was ready for it's armed services to fight to the last man dropped.

All of the backdrop above said, I think that first trying to demonstrate the bomb on a remote, uninhabited place was the moral choice. But make no mistake, whether killed by conventional weaponry (guns, artillery, aerial bombardment) or atomic weapons, (and particularly a land invasion) just as many would likely have been killed, and more counting both sides. Before unleashing such a horror on a civilian population, one would think that every other possible strategy would have been tried, short of invasion.

Basically, the atomic cat was getting ready to jump out of the proverbial bag so to speak.

Germany, Japan, and Russia were pursing the bomb but the USA was able to make it first.

No one knew what it would do until it was tested in New Mexico.

If Germany or Japan or Russia got the bomb first would we even be having this conversation? Probably not, as we would never have been born.

War is inhuman and WW 2 Japan and Germany were indeed very genocidal and racist and both sought world domination. The USSR was seeking world domination as well. These countries hated the west. Japanese soldiers were the most inhumane - just google search the - Rape of Nan King - fall of Hong Kong and nurses - Bataan death March and prison camps. How they treated the Burmese civilians. They were ready to massacre many POW's and did before the end of WW2.

The people were brainwashed to think in a group think fashion and for many - death was lighter than a feather... look that one up too.

The issue was the USSR and them getting the bomb before the USA or letting them know we had it first and ready for use. Germany surrendered and thus freeing up USSR forces to invade and take over parts of China which they did as they pused the Japanese back. Question: How do you stop the Russians form taking territory and them never leaving it after the war ended?

Answer drop the bomb ...

Moral or immoral is a mute point - not even part of the equation. The US could have not dropped it and fire bombed the rest of Japanese cities and the USSR invade the northern part of Japan and the west the southern part. How do you get the Russian to leave once millions of more Japanese civilians, soldiers, and allied soldiers and would be lost and the economic cost to each country weighed in too.

Dropping the atomic bomb was cheaper, it stopped the USSR for a bit to be less aggressive, in the longer run, would cost less lives than another year of fighting. Peace overtures to Japan were all turned down. Japanese fought to the last man and were suicidal foes fearing no death to kill as many allied personal as they could.

Yes we bombed with conventional bombs the oil reserves Japan had but they would still fight. Japanese Women and children were being groomed and taught how to kill with bamboo poles as spears or blow themselves up terrorist style.

Actually there was no choice - the bomb had to be dropped to save lives and deter the Soviets till they got the bomb.

War is Hell - without mercy. Vile and cruel. Germany began WW2 and Japan joined Germany and bomb Pearl Harbor first. War was thrust upon the USA which was largely pacifist and anti war at that time. This angered the US of A population and 'unleash a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve,' as quoted form the movie Tora Tora Tora... points out

Now, thanks to the leftist cultural Marxist ie militant progressives: North Korea and Iran have Nukes and the world is a very unsafe place once again by their PC hate of America and selling out to appease the tyrants of the world today....

Neighbor named Albert passed away 2009. WWII Veteran. I got to know him we had a few drinks (yes a late 80's man having drinks) he told me his ship was sunk by the Japanese ....and after they sent a fast boat out with a mounted gun ... AFTER they already sunk the ship to machine gun everyone in the water ... part of the hull was still floating somehow or maybe it was the rail upside down and most were clinging to it. I forget how he said but he said they drove past it tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat just massacring everyone in the water. Only him and a dozen or so other guys survived somehow because of an escort or something so the "Japs" did not come back after running out of bullets. (here comes Curry to call me a liar).

He died that year of an intestinal blockage. Something to do with folds or pockets. What I heard from the other neighbor, he had to drive himself to the Hospital because his own kids were too "busy" to pick him up and stood him up. He didn't want to pay for an Ambulance so he ended up waiting for them ..then they never showed up. So he died driving himself to the hospital.

I thought that was really f'd up. Thanks for serving our country in WWII and raising us Dad. We are too busy now as adults. Call an Ambulance or drive yourself. Have a nice day.

-Lately I question weather it should've ever gotten to that point. I question weather the United States should've ever gotten into WWII and if so, to what extent. The U.S. set up an excuse to declare war against Japan. They set the stage for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. There is evidence Truman knew Pearl Harbor would be attacked and intentionally did nothing except rub his hands together with glee. Now he had the excuse he needed to declare war.

I was at an art gallery on the Queen Mary called the Art of Sir Winston Churchill. And boy you better believe me when I say Winston Churchill's paintings STUNK. The guy had no talent whatsoever. The impression I got was he fancied himself and artist . So he "practiced" until sheer experience masked his talent-less artwork. This is my opinion only.

Anyways .... the Gallery said his daughter or step daughter donated the work. Now there was this original newspaper article in a fame dated 1 DAY after his death sort of in the other area of the gallery area. For some reason my eyes fixed on the newspaper.. it was like something was telling me .. this is what you NEED to look at ...this is the most valuable thing in this exhibit .. here take a look. Well the article said 'Churchill was a Failure' at 60 'Success' at 65 or something like that. I thought it was bizzare anyone would write such an article about Churchill much less an original from the Detroit Press. Much less such a scathing title for an article 1 day after his death. I only heard positive rosey perfect things about Churchill in school. Even the history professors in college. Never surrender and all that. So seeing this was a bit shocking. Like I "discovered' something or was "onto" something I should not have known about. That's how it felt.

The question kept nagging me: HOW does any man go from a FAILURE in life to a world renown success in a mere 5 years or whatever. Well I started looking online and it seems there is a compelling argument online from mainstream and dissident intellectuals ..... Churchill used the RAF to force Hilters hand above the British generals insistence to the contrary.... because he wanted to drag Britain into WWII in order to satisfy his own poltical agenda - to become a rich and famous. I was absolutely shocked.

I did not know Hitler wanted to avoid war with GB at all costs. I did not know Hilter only attacked GB AFTER Germany was attacked over and over by RAF bombers.

The whole thing has me questioning the validity of WWII. Validity meaning the official story I was raised to believe in as a matter of fact... but there is no way for me to know without extensive study to become an expert on WWII which takes decades of study.

So on one hand the answer, putting Christianity aside, if the Atom Bomb on Japan was an immoral act is NO.

On the other hand it's YES because it seems we should have never been involved in the first place.

-Lately I question weather it should've ever gotten to that point. I question weather the United States should've ever gotten into WWII and if so, to what extent. The U.S. set up an excuse to declare war against Japan.

An excuse to declare war? They attacked us just as they attacked China, Korea, and countless other countries; what were se supposed to do? Allow them to take over our country and slaughter civilians like they did to the other countries they took over? Are you kidding me???

Blessed wrote: They set the stage for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

Exactly what did the US do to cajole Japan into attacking us? Peaceful sanctions? You jokin’right?

Blessed wrote: The question kept nagging me: HOW does any man go from a FAILURE in life to a world renown success in a mere 5 years or whatever. Well I started looking online and it seems there is a compelling argument online from mainstream and dissident intellectuals ..... Churchill used the RAF to force Hilters hand above the British generals insistence to the contrary....

Blessed wrote: because he wanted to drag Britain into WWII in order to satisfy his own poltical agenda - to become a rich and famous. I was absolutely shocked.

I did not know Hitler wanted to avoid war with GB at all costs. I did not know Hilter only attacked GB AFTER Germany was attacked over and over by RAF bombers.

Neville Chamberlin went to Germany and agreed to let Hitler have specific territories as long as he quits invading countries; and Hitler agreed. Remember Chamberlin stepping off the plain with the piece of paper in his hand claiming peace in our time? Hitler broke his word and continued attacking England's Allies so England had no choice but to go to war.

Blessed wrote: The whole thing has me questioning the validity of WWII. Validity meaning the official story I was raised to believe in as a matter of fact... but there is no way for me to know without extensive study to become an expert on WWII which takes decades of study.

So on one hand the answer, putting Christianity aside, if the Atom Bomb on Japan was an immoral act is NO.

On the other hand it's YES because it seems we should have never been involved in the first place.

Yeah, Hitler was a peace-loving guy who had no ambitions beyond Germany's historical territories? That's why it's submarines were constantly sinking ships in the Atlantic. A deluded, evil megalomaniac bent on genocide, building a war machine like no other - really, if he'd conquered Europe, wonder who his next target was? And FAR better to fight such a threat across the oceans, than to wait until it is upon your shores. Just imagine if Germany had developed the bomb first???!!! Imagine Hitler, possessing such, as he'd ordered no retreat, ordering such a bombing as part of his last, suicidal orders?

And other things they did caused the USA to impose sanctions and cut off Japans Oil supply from the USA. What do you think would of worked better? Keep giving them what oil? Appease them? No, that does not work.

Japan and Germany and Italy were not innocent victims of western aggression, they instigated aggression. Italy invaded Ethiopia 1935-36 and well just research what they did ...

Chemical weapons do not appear to have been used in the war until Ethiopia launched its ‘Christmas offensive’ of 1935, which blunted an Italian offensive and succeeded in temporarily cutting off some communication and supply lines.

In December 1935 Italian aircraft dropped tear gas grenades and asphyxiating gas over the Takkaze Valley in north-eastern Ethiopia. Italy controlled the air and initially dropped sulphur mustard air bombs but later shifted to the use of aerial spray tanks. Sulphur mustard air bombs reportedly caused most of the chemical weapon casualties.

11 The use of sulphur mustard played an important role in shifting the momentum of fighting in favour of the Italian forces and in demoralizing the Ethiopian forces. Its use resulted in many long-lasting, painful injuries and in a significant number of deaths.12 Italy also used chemical weapons in the Battle of Shire (29 February–2 March 1936), the Battle of Maychew (31 March 1936) and in attacks on the remnants of Ethiopian forces in the Lake Ashangi region starting in April. The last reported use of chemical weapons by Italy was in April 1936.13 That month the Ethiopian Government also provided a list of towns it said had been attacked with chemical weapons (see table 1). Italy’s use of chemical weapons had a strategic effect on the conduct of the war and, as operations progressed, Italian forces were able to deliver large quantities of sulphur mustard against target areas. Chemical weapons were used to protect the flanks of Italian supply routes and lines of attack and as a ‘force multiplier’ to increase disruption in the Ethiopian forces by hindering communication, demoralizing troops and confusing troop movements.

Soviet estimate states that 15 000 of the 50 000 Ethiopian casualties in the war
were caused by chemical weapons.

ACB: First off,I said alittle too PC for me.Overall,I agree with your take on it but it just bothered me a tad-bit with you suggesting that perhpas we should have demonstrated the power of such a bomb in a remote area first.It is alittle too PC for me.

ACB, PC is just going along with the crowd, being afraid to go against popular opinion. And considering a demonstration was so "PC" that Truman considered it. And probably the PC view of the era would have been something along the lines of, "Lets kill as many Japanese as possible!" But YOU think it's PC to consider and alternative to dropping such a horrendous bomb upon a huge civilian population of non-combatants, babies, women and children? As a Christian, we are to show compassion where and whenever we can. Pure military or military industrial targets are understandable to target.

Was the Marshall Plan also too PC for you?

Sorry,but I do still think it was political correctness trying to get involved in a war.Just imagine the money and lives saved if we had did that first.The war would have been over much sooner with alot less lives lost and money and it would've sent a message to not attack the US or you will suffer or it.Remember Pearl Harbor was bombed first.We would have been alot safer. But war is ugly no matter how we look at it and examine it.

Pearl Harbor was a military target, with an estimated 3700 American casualties, of which 48-68 were civilian.

An estimated 192,000 lives were lost as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima. The majority were civilians.

Imagine how much safer we would have been if we could have dropped it right after they attacked Pearl Harbor and the lives and money saved. Other countries would know that you do not attack the US or you will pay for it.But when we got bogged down in war and lost so many lives and it was a close war,it costed so much money and lives, we lost respect.

Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.

-Lately I question weather it should've ever gotten to that point. I question weather the United States should've ever gotten into WWII and if so, to what extent. The U.S. set up an excuse to declare war against Japan.

An excuse to declare war? They attacked us just as they attacked China, Korea, and countless other countries; what were se supposed to do? Allow them to take over our country and slaughter civilians like they did to the other countries they took over? Are you kidding me???

Blessed wrote: They set the stage for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

Exactly what did the US do to cajole Japan into attacking us? Peaceful sanctions? You jokin’right?

Blessed wrote: The question kept nagging me: HOW does any man go from a FAILURE in life to a world renown success in a mere 5 years or whatever. Well I started looking online and it seems there is a compelling argument online from mainstream and dissident intellectuals ..... Churchill used the RAF to force Hilters hand above the British generals insistence to the contrary....

Blessed wrote: because he wanted to drag Britain into WWII in order to satisfy his own poltical agenda - to become a rich and famous. I was absolutely shocked.

I did not know Hitler wanted to avoid war with GB at all costs. I did not know Hilter only attacked GB AFTER Germany was attacked over and over by RAF bombers.

Neville Chamberlin went to Germany and agreed to let Hitler have specific territories as long as he quits invading countries; and Hitler agreed. Remember Chamberlin stepping off the plain with the piece of paper in his hand claiming peace in our time? Hitler broke his word and continued attacking England's Allies so England had no choice but to go to war.

Blessed wrote: The whole thing has me questioning the validity of WWII. Validity meaning the official story I was raised to believe in as a matter of fact... but there is no way for me to know without extensive study to become an expert on WWII which takes decades of study.

So on one hand the answer, putting Christianity aside, if the Atom Bomb on Japan was an immoral act is NO.

On the other hand it's YES because it seems we should have never been involved in the first place.

I looked up various information and found a video and a book called "Churchills War" by a Historian named David Erwing. He said Churchill ordered RAF to bomb Berlin 6-7 nights straight forcing Hitler into war with Britain. He said Churchill tried to bring the USA into the war a long time before USA entered it and that UK knew where all the U-boats where. Then he said Churchill provided logistics routes to make American ships purposefully cross them to get attacked. He said a government swat team arrested him for hate speech, confiscated his original WWII documents proving his positions, and burned them. This got me interested in other reading material. Because if something is not true it about WWII - it doesn't required hate speech laws and SWAT teams and destroying evidence to prove it's not true. Quite the opposite. The guy has been labeled a Nazi and he might be. But I don't care about his ideology. I only care about the truth. The facts. Nothing else. My whole life I was told a story about WWII and all this is new information. Including those X-ray scanners banned from the liberated concentration camps and the people who brought them arrested on Holocaust denial. Either something is true or it isn't. And the truth does not fear being examined or questioned. It's as simple as that. I know Hitler was an evil person. That's not even in dispute in my mind. The official narrative of WWII is. What happened in the Wienmar Republic who bought up all the real estate and factories for pennies on the dollar and who owned all the banks and what their real agenda was,. that role they really played in WWII .. and all that.

-Lately I question weather it should've ever gotten to that point. I question weather the United States should've ever gotten into WWII and if so, to what extent. The U.S. set up an excuse to declare war against Japan.

An excuse to declare war? They attacked us just as they attacked China, Korea, and countless other countries; what were se supposed to do? Allow them to take over our country and slaughter civilians like they did to the other countries they took over? Are you kidding me???

Blessed wrote: They set the stage for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

Exactly what did the US do to cajole Japan into attacking us? Peaceful sanctions? You jokin’right?

Blessed wrote: The question kept nagging me: HOW does any man go from a FAILURE in life to a world renown success in a mere 5 years or whatever. Well I started looking online and it seems there is a compelling argument online from mainstream and dissident intellectuals ..... Churchill used the RAF to force Hilters hand above the British generals insistence to the contrary....

Blessed wrote: because he wanted to drag Britain into WWII in order to satisfy his own poltical agenda - to become a rich and famous. I was absolutely shocked.

I did not know Hitler wanted to avoid war with GB at all costs. I did not know Hilter only attacked GB AFTER Germany was attacked over and over by RAF bombers.

Neville Chamberlin went to Germany and agreed to let Hitler have specific territories as long as he quits invading countries; and Hitler agreed. Remember Chamberlin stepping off the plain with the piece of paper in his hand claiming peace in our time? Hitler broke his word and continued attacking England's Allies so England had no choice but to go to war.

Blessed wrote: The whole thing has me questioning the validity of WWII. Validity meaning the official story I was raised to believe in as a matter of fact... but there is no way for me to know without extensive study to become an expert on WWII which takes decades of study.

So on one hand the answer, putting Christianity aside, if the Atom Bomb on Japan was an immoral act is NO.

On the other hand it's YES because it seems we should have never been involved in the first place.

I looked up various information and found a video and a book called "Churchills War" by a Historian named David Erwing. He said Churchill ordered RAF to bomb Berlin 6-7 nights straight forcing Hitler into war with Britain. He said Churchill tried to bring the USA into the war a long time before USA entered it and that UK knew where all the U-boats where. Then he said Churchill provided logistics routes to make American ships purposefully cross them to get attacked. He said a government swat team arrested him for hate speech, confiscated his original WWII documents proving his positions, and burned them. This got me interested in other reading material. Because if something is not true it about WWII - it doesn't required hate speech laws and SWAT teams and destroying evidence to prove it's not true. Quite the opposite. The guy has been labeled a Nazi and he might be. But I don't care about his ideology. I only care about the truth. The facts. Nothing else. My whole life I was told a story about WWII and all this is new information. Including those X-ray scanners banned from the liberated concentration camps and the people who brought them arrested on Holocaust denial. Either something is true or it isn't. And the truth does not fear being examined or questioned. It's as simple as that. I know Hitler was an evil person. That's not even in dispute in my mind. The official narrative of WWII is. What happened in the Wienmar Republic who bought up all the real estate and factories for pennies on the dollar and who owned all the banks and what their real agenda was,. that role they really played in WWII .. and all that.

Where did you learn your history?

I did a quick google search on David Irving and his book Hitlers War. David Irving is an English author who is also a Holocaust denier, and there is a long list of historians who dispute his work. As far as him being a historian, apparently his reputation as a historian was discredited when in the course of an unsuccessful libel case he filed against an American historian he was shown to have deliberately misrepresented historical evidence to promote holocaust denial. An English court found that his books had distorted the history of Hitlers role in the Holocaust and that he deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence.